The Associated Press quoted the spokesman of a British bookmaker as saying he doubted there was any wrongdoing. The common-sense explanation is that people heard about Odesnik's injury and took the other guy instead. The Brits have a different take on it.

Odesnik had been spotted the evening before in a pub in London's Earl's Court, O'Neills, but insisted he had been there only "for dinner". He also confirmed the rumours circulating on betting forums prior to the match that he had been carrying an injury into the match. "I had a little bit of an injury in my last grass-court tournament this year," he said.

Those quotes around "for dinner" might as well read "we're not buying that for a second".

There's no proof that Odesnik did anything wrong, so this could just be an example of British muckraking. But why the change in tone from one side of the Atlantic to the other?